Tweet
WHO'S PAYING SCHMIDT LAWYERS?
Cincinnati.com
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100802/NEWS0108/8010364/Who-s-paying-Schmidt-lawyers-
Aug 2 2010
WASHINGTON
Complaint claims illegal free help
Rep. Jean Schmidt isn't Turkish, and there aren't many Turks in her
southern Ohio district, but the Miami Township Republican is deeply
invested in a legal battle stemming from the Turkish denial of the
Armenian genocide.
And that battle could land her in a heap of trouble.
At issue is whether Schmidt accepted what foes estimate to be at least
$200,000 worth of free representation from a Turkish legal group so
she could file two cases against former opponent David Krikorian,
who is of Armenian descent.
Schmidt spokesman Bruce Pfaff told The Enquirer that the Schmidt
campaign hired the Turkish American Legal Defense Fund to represent
her in both cases against Krikorian. Pfaff said she is in the process
of setting up a legal expense fund to pay the organization's fees.
Krikorian, who ran unsuccessfully as an independent in 2008 and as a
Democrat in this year's primary, has filed a complaint over this issue
with the Office of Congressional Ethics, which forwards complaints
of merit to the official House ethics committee for further action.
Investigations aren't typically made public unless a sanction is made.
Krikorian's complaint is dated July 13.
He alleges that Schmidt, or her campaign, accepted free legal services
from TALDF, which would be a violation of campaign finance laws or
House gift rules, or both.
If it turns out she violated campaign finance laws or House rules,
she could face a fine, a reprimand, or much more - such as an ethics
investigation.
Haven't gotten the bill yet Since her first case filed with the Ohio
Elections Commission in May 2009, Schmidt's campaign finance reports
have not indicated any payment or debt for legal services, or any
in-kind gifts from TALDF for the work. A separate lawsuit was filed
against Krikorian this past June. Again, no payments were listed in her
latest campaign finance report, which covers activity until June 30.
Schmidt spokesman Pfaff said that's because the cases are still going
on. He turned down a request to speak to the congresswoman directly.
"I don't believe that there has been a bill for their services to
this point," he said, adding that the lawyers are waiting for the
legal expense fund to be set up before submitting a bill.
But statements made under oath in August 2009 by Bruce Fein, who
handles cases for TALDF and is representing Schmidt, and former
Schmidt chief of staff Barry Bennett seem to contradict this. They
suggest the TALDF would pay the legal bills for Schmidt's case.
When asked whether TALDF had charged the Schmidt campaign any money
for representation, Fein said: "The answer is no. We stated that we
would do this and we would not charge them legal fees."
Krikorian's lawyer asked Bennett, "And there's no ethics issue
associated with Turkish American Legal Defense Funds paying for Ms.
Schmidt's legal fees?"
Bennett replied: "No, not that I'm aware of."
These statements were made in depositions taken for the Ohio Elections
Commission case. They were submitted to the Office of Congressional
Ethics as part of Krikorian's request for a formal investigation.
'We have not paid them' So the question becomes: Were Schmidt's
lawyers paid, and if so, by whom?
Pfaff said he didn't know the answer. "We have not paid them," he said.
Schmidt has been represented by three lawyers: Fein and David Salzman,
both of Fein & Salzman in Washington, who are also listed as contacts
on the TALDF Web site; and Donald C. Brey of Chester, Willcox &
Saxbe in Columbus.
The Enquirer reached Fein by phone to ask whether Schmidt had paid
Fein & Salzman. He said, "I've stated all that I'm going to say on
the record," before hanging up.
Brey did not return phone and e-mail messages seeking comment.
According to the Federal Election Commission, as long as no bills
have been submitted or paid, then no laws have been violated. Schmidt
would be required to report the cost of the legal services when the
bill is received, listed either as a debt or paid for by campaign
funds or a legal expense fund.
Pfaff has said in previous news reports that the lawyers spent more
than 200 hours on the case. There were travel fees involved for them
as well as a witness, court reporting fees and other costs. He declined
to estimate the total cost.
In his complaint, Krikorian guessed that the total cost could
range from $200,000 to $500,000, which would exceed what Schmidt's
congressional office or campaign is legally allowed to accept.
Christopher P. Finney, a Cincinnati lawyer who is representing
Krikorian, said he finds it highly unlikely, not to mention extremely
unusual, that any law firm would go 15 months without submitting a
bill, especially when the costs are that high.
Pfaff said Schmidt's office has been in touch with the House Committee
on Standards of Official Conduct, commonly referred to as the House
ethics committee, since the "very beginning." When asked for a specific
date, he said, "conversations," and a request for an advisory opinion
from the committee, occurred in September 2009.
A long feud Schmidt's first case was filed in May 2009, and Pfaff
said there was a delay in formally communicating with the committee
because it took several months to figure out how to proceed.
He said the committee responded in writing in February. He declined to
release the committee's letter because it's protected by "congressional
privilege" and could be used in Schmidt's pending case against
Krikorian. The Enquirer turned down an offer to view the document
unless it could report on what it said.
"I want people to recognize that David Krikorian is willing to say or
do anything to attack the congresswoman with little or no proof. He
has no understanding of how long it takes to get things through the
House committee here, and he has no understanding of what discussions
we've had with the House committee on this matter," he added.
Schmidt's legal battles with Krikorian go back to the 2008 election.
In a complaint filed with the Ohio Elections Commission in May 2009,
she alleged that Krikorian had made false and damaging statements
on his campaign website when he said she took "blood money" to deny
the Armenian genocide, in which more than a million Armenians were
killed by Turks at the end of World War I. The Turkish government
says there were massacres on both sides in the conflict as the Ottoman
Empire collapsed.
For the record, Schmidt said she does not believe that the events of
1915 constitute a genocide. Regardless, she argued before the OEC that
the campaign donations she received from Turkish sources came from
American donors and not the Turkish government, which would be illegal.
The OEC ruled in her favor in October, issuing a written reprimand
to Krikorian for making false statements.
Then this June, Schmidt filed a lawsuit against Krikorian in Clermont
County Common Pleas Court seeking $6.8 million in compensatory and
punitive damages, alleging that Krikorian had again accused her of
taking "blood money" from the Turks.
Schmidt has long been a darling of the Turkish community.
In May 2009, right after filing the Ohio Elections Commission complaint
against Krikorian, she traveled to Turkey, courtesy of the Turkish
Coalition of America. The following month, an editorial she wrote
was published in Today's Zaman, a Turkish newspaper.
In Congress, she has praised the founding of Turkey on the House
floor, opposed legislation recognizing the Armenian genocide, and
joined the Caucus on U.S.-Turkish Relations. She has also marched
as grand marshal in a Turkish Day Parade, lunched with a group of
Turks at Cafe Istanbul in Newport, and raised thousands in campaign
contributions from Turkish Americans.
According to the last census, there are just 3,159 Turks in Ohio,
including 297 in the 2nd Congressional District.
From: A. Papazian
Cincinnati.com
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100802/NEWS0108/8010364/Who-s-paying-Schmidt-lawyers-
Aug 2 2010
WASHINGTON
Complaint claims illegal free help
Rep. Jean Schmidt isn't Turkish, and there aren't many Turks in her
southern Ohio district, but the Miami Township Republican is deeply
invested in a legal battle stemming from the Turkish denial of the
Armenian genocide.
And that battle could land her in a heap of trouble.
At issue is whether Schmidt accepted what foes estimate to be at least
$200,000 worth of free representation from a Turkish legal group so
she could file two cases against former opponent David Krikorian,
who is of Armenian descent.
Schmidt spokesman Bruce Pfaff told The Enquirer that the Schmidt
campaign hired the Turkish American Legal Defense Fund to represent
her in both cases against Krikorian. Pfaff said she is in the process
of setting up a legal expense fund to pay the organization's fees.
Krikorian, who ran unsuccessfully as an independent in 2008 and as a
Democrat in this year's primary, has filed a complaint over this issue
with the Office of Congressional Ethics, which forwards complaints
of merit to the official House ethics committee for further action.
Investigations aren't typically made public unless a sanction is made.
Krikorian's complaint is dated July 13.
He alleges that Schmidt, or her campaign, accepted free legal services
from TALDF, which would be a violation of campaign finance laws or
House gift rules, or both.
If it turns out she violated campaign finance laws or House rules,
she could face a fine, a reprimand, or much more - such as an ethics
investigation.
Haven't gotten the bill yet Since her first case filed with the Ohio
Elections Commission in May 2009, Schmidt's campaign finance reports
have not indicated any payment or debt for legal services, or any
in-kind gifts from TALDF for the work. A separate lawsuit was filed
against Krikorian this past June. Again, no payments were listed in her
latest campaign finance report, which covers activity until June 30.
Schmidt spokesman Pfaff said that's because the cases are still going
on. He turned down a request to speak to the congresswoman directly.
"I don't believe that there has been a bill for their services to
this point," he said, adding that the lawyers are waiting for the
legal expense fund to be set up before submitting a bill.
But statements made under oath in August 2009 by Bruce Fein, who
handles cases for TALDF and is representing Schmidt, and former
Schmidt chief of staff Barry Bennett seem to contradict this. They
suggest the TALDF would pay the legal bills for Schmidt's case.
When asked whether TALDF had charged the Schmidt campaign any money
for representation, Fein said: "The answer is no. We stated that we
would do this and we would not charge them legal fees."
Krikorian's lawyer asked Bennett, "And there's no ethics issue
associated with Turkish American Legal Defense Funds paying for Ms.
Schmidt's legal fees?"
Bennett replied: "No, not that I'm aware of."
These statements were made in depositions taken for the Ohio Elections
Commission case. They were submitted to the Office of Congressional
Ethics as part of Krikorian's request for a formal investigation.
'We have not paid them' So the question becomes: Were Schmidt's
lawyers paid, and if so, by whom?
Pfaff said he didn't know the answer. "We have not paid them," he said.
Schmidt has been represented by three lawyers: Fein and David Salzman,
both of Fein & Salzman in Washington, who are also listed as contacts
on the TALDF Web site; and Donald C. Brey of Chester, Willcox &
Saxbe in Columbus.
The Enquirer reached Fein by phone to ask whether Schmidt had paid
Fein & Salzman. He said, "I've stated all that I'm going to say on
the record," before hanging up.
Brey did not return phone and e-mail messages seeking comment.
According to the Federal Election Commission, as long as no bills
have been submitted or paid, then no laws have been violated. Schmidt
would be required to report the cost of the legal services when the
bill is received, listed either as a debt or paid for by campaign
funds or a legal expense fund.
Pfaff has said in previous news reports that the lawyers spent more
than 200 hours on the case. There were travel fees involved for them
as well as a witness, court reporting fees and other costs. He declined
to estimate the total cost.
In his complaint, Krikorian guessed that the total cost could
range from $200,000 to $500,000, which would exceed what Schmidt's
congressional office or campaign is legally allowed to accept.
Christopher P. Finney, a Cincinnati lawyer who is representing
Krikorian, said he finds it highly unlikely, not to mention extremely
unusual, that any law firm would go 15 months without submitting a
bill, especially when the costs are that high.
Pfaff said Schmidt's office has been in touch with the House Committee
on Standards of Official Conduct, commonly referred to as the House
ethics committee, since the "very beginning." When asked for a specific
date, he said, "conversations," and a request for an advisory opinion
from the committee, occurred in September 2009.
A long feud Schmidt's first case was filed in May 2009, and Pfaff
said there was a delay in formally communicating with the committee
because it took several months to figure out how to proceed.
He said the committee responded in writing in February. He declined to
release the committee's letter because it's protected by "congressional
privilege" and could be used in Schmidt's pending case against
Krikorian. The Enquirer turned down an offer to view the document
unless it could report on what it said.
"I want people to recognize that David Krikorian is willing to say or
do anything to attack the congresswoman with little or no proof. He
has no understanding of how long it takes to get things through the
House committee here, and he has no understanding of what discussions
we've had with the House committee on this matter," he added.
Schmidt's legal battles with Krikorian go back to the 2008 election.
In a complaint filed with the Ohio Elections Commission in May 2009,
she alleged that Krikorian had made false and damaging statements
on his campaign website when he said she took "blood money" to deny
the Armenian genocide, in which more than a million Armenians were
killed by Turks at the end of World War I. The Turkish government
says there were massacres on both sides in the conflict as the Ottoman
Empire collapsed.
For the record, Schmidt said she does not believe that the events of
1915 constitute a genocide. Regardless, she argued before the OEC that
the campaign donations she received from Turkish sources came from
American donors and not the Turkish government, which would be illegal.
The OEC ruled in her favor in October, issuing a written reprimand
to Krikorian for making false statements.
Then this June, Schmidt filed a lawsuit against Krikorian in Clermont
County Common Pleas Court seeking $6.8 million in compensatory and
punitive damages, alleging that Krikorian had again accused her of
taking "blood money" from the Turks.
Schmidt has long been a darling of the Turkish community.
In May 2009, right after filing the Ohio Elections Commission complaint
against Krikorian, she traveled to Turkey, courtesy of the Turkish
Coalition of America. The following month, an editorial she wrote
was published in Today's Zaman, a Turkish newspaper.
In Congress, she has praised the founding of Turkey on the House
floor, opposed legislation recognizing the Armenian genocide, and
joined the Caucus on U.S.-Turkish Relations. She has also marched
as grand marshal in a Turkish Day Parade, lunched with a group of
Turks at Cafe Istanbul in Newport, and raised thousands in campaign
contributions from Turkish Americans.
According to the last census, there are just 3,159 Turks in Ohio,
including 297 in the 2nd Congressional District.
From: A. Papazian